DISTRIBUTION 

OF 

STATE COMMON SCHOOL FUND 



TO MAKE ILLINOIS A LEADER 

AMONG THE STATES IN 

STATE AID FOR SCHOOLS 



PRINCIPAL FACTORS 

TEACHING SERVICE 

THE TRAINED TEACHER 

PUPIL ATTENDANCE 

" { ' (Third Edition) 
DESIGNED TO ACCOMPANY 

SENATE BILL 220 

FIFTY-THIRD GENERAL ASSEMBLY 
STATE OF ILLINOIS 



.X-5A5 

The Illinois Educational Commission was created by act of the 
Fifty-second General Assembly. 

The Commission was directed: 

(a) "To investigate the entire educational system of this state, with 
a view to standardization, unification and correlation of its various 
efforts, ... as are in harmony with the educational requirements 
of the State and the most advanced educational thought. 

(b) "To suggest for the guidance and assistance of the next General 
Assembly such revision of school laws as may be necessary, and prepare 
drafts of proposed Acts." 

Senate Bill 220 has been prepared by the Commission to comply with 
the command given in the law as quoted above. The bill is the result of 
much investigation and earnest effort. 

It replaces the haphazard, antiquated method in the distribution 
of state aid and will correct one of the greatest fundamental weaknesses 
in Illinois' system of education. 

The membership of the Commission is as follows : 

Hon. Len Small, ex-oflficio; 
Senator Wm. Scott Gray, Coatsburg; 
Representative Harry Wilson, Pinckneyville; 
Dean C. M. Thomson, Urbana; "'• •' 

Mrs. M. H. Libber, Winnetka; '"" 

SuPT. W. W. Lewton, President, Cicero. 



LIBF^ARY OF CONGRr33 

??ECeiVEO 

JMNl 1^. 

— I iii m ifc r l t l H i f ii n niMlHxainlMM— 1 

[2] 






A DIGEST OF SENATE BILL 220 PROVIDING FOR 

A MORE EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION OF 

THE STATE SCHOOL FUND 

The purposes of a state common school fund are : 

(1) To equalize, as far as possible, the opportunities for a good ele- 
mentary education for every child in the state. 

(2) To stimulate local effort for better schools. 

(3) To encourage the employment of better trained teachers and 
to provide opportunities for young men and women to secure better 
training for teaching service. 

The existing method of distribution of the state school fund in Illi- 
nois does not accomplish these purposes. Each school district in the 
state receives an allotment from the fund in the ratio of the number of 
persons under twenty-one years of age residing in the district to the total 
of such persons in the state. This method of distribution does not give 
adequate aid where it is most needed. It bears only a very general 
relation to the number of children actually attending school. It does 
not encourage a district to improve its schools. It does not encourage the 
employment of trained teachers. 

The proposed plan does not change the established machinery for the 
distribution of the state school fund. It does provide a method of ap- 
portionment that, in large measure, will give aid to those districts which 
show a willingness to help themselves to as good schools as their means 
make possible. 



13] 



THE TEACHER-SCHOOL-DAY 

"The teacher-school-day, which shall constitute one basis for apportionment, shall 
consist of class sessions of not less than four clock hours class time work per day, con- 
ducted by a full time elementary teacher with not less than nine pupils between the ages 
of six and twenty-one years in a school grade not lower than the first grade nor higher 
than the eighth grade. Days during which schools are not in session, because of an act 
of God or upon the order of the Board of Health or other proper authority other than the 
Board of Directors or Board of Education, shall be deemed school days and shall be in- 
cluded in determining the number of teacher-school-days. 

"A sum of seventy-five cents shall be apportioned to each county for each teachei'- 
school-day or major fraction thereof." [S. B. 220, I. 214] 



The state is interested in lengthening the school year in order that 
all the children of the state may have as good educational opportunities 
as some of the children now have. To bring this about the state will give 
each school district for each teacher employed seventy-five cents per 
day for every day the schools are in session. 

It is a serious economic loss to run a low enrollment school. In six 
school districts in one county there are fifty-six pupils, with an average 
per capita cost of $214.00. In a certain district there are two pupils. 
The two are the children of a director. The annual cost is $490.00 for 
each pupil. The average per capita cost for elementary pupils in 1922 
was $53.80. In one of the most fertile counties there is a school with 
three pupils. One of these lives nearer a graded village school than the 
one he attends. Another lives as near another rural school as the one he 
attends. The third is a relative of the teacher, who is a relative of one 
of the directors of the school. 

Pupils cannot receive social and educational stimulus under such 
conditions. Therefore, the state is not willing to extend aid to a school 
with an attendance of fewer than nine pupils. 



4] 



EQUALIZING EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY 

"In addition thereto the following apportionment shall be made to the counties: 

"(1) The sum of $2.00 for each teacher-school-day in school districts of the county hav- 
ing an assessed valuation of property, per full time elementary teacher, of $25,000.00 or 
less. 

"(2) The sum of $1.50 for each teacher-school-day in school districts of the county hav- 
ing an assessed valuation of property, per full time elementary teacher, of more than 
$25,000.00 and up to and including $30,000.00. 

"(3) The sum of $1.00 for each teacher-school-day in school districts of the county hav- 
ing an assessed valuation of property, per full time elementary teacher, of more than 
$30,000.00 and up to and including $35,000.00. 

"(4) The sum of 50 cents for each teacher-school-day in school districts of the county hav- 
ing an assessed valuation of property, per full time elementary teacher, of more than 
$35,000. 00 and up to and including $40,000. 00." [S. B. 220, 1. 224] 



The state is convinced that a proper school cannot be maintained 
unless each district have an educational fund of at least $800.00 for each 
teacher it employs. To bring this about the state will give low- valuation 
districts sufficient aid to bring their funds up to the amount of $800.00 
per teacher. 

It is not to be understood that this $800.00 is all that such a district 
is to receive. As is shown elsewhere in this section and in sections second, 
third, and fourth, hereinafter, the district may receive further amounts 
for the teacher-school-day, for the teacher's normal training, for pupil 
attendance, and, in case of a one-room elementary school, an additional 
amount if the teacher is a normal school graduate, — up to a possible 
total of $1,000 or $1,100. 



[5] 



EQUALIZING EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY 

"If in any year a school district does not levy the maximum rate allowed by law 
(without referendum) for educational purposes, no apportionment on the teacher-school- 
day basis under the provisions of paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, shall be made to the 
county for the benefit of such district for that year." [S. B. 220, 1. 238] 



The state believes that these low-vakiation districts should do all they 
are able to do to help themselves before they should expect the state to 
give them this special assistance. 

Each district has within itself the motive for and the incentive to 
educational improvement. Each local community should have as 
great a desire for a good school as does the larger group of which it is a 
part. Consequently, the state seeks to enlist this desire and to stimulate 
this incentive, in the only way that it can be done, — namely, by offering 
a reward. 

K the state offers a reward, it has the right to make the conditions 
under which the grant can be obtained. 

If the district fails to appreciate the offer made by the state by help- 
ing itself as much as it is able then the state surely is justified in with- 
holding the special aid it offers. 



6) 



A STATE DUTY— TO PLACE TRAINED TEACHERS 
IN THE SCHOOLS 

"There shall be apportioned to each county, for each elementary teacher, supei-- 
vising principal, supervisor of elementary academic subjects or teacher or supervisor of 
special elementary subjects regularly employed by a school district of the county for full 
time work in grades one to eight inclusive and for teachers or supervisors of special ele- 
mentary subjects regularly employed by a school district of the coimty for part time work 
in grades one to eight inclusive in proportion to the time employed, amounts based upon 
training beyond the twelfth grade in a recognized high school, as follows: 

"(1) For each teacher who has had at least eighteen weeks of normal school training, or 
its equivalent, fifty cents per week for each week not exceeding thirty-six weeks that such 
teacher is employed. 

"(2) For each teacher who has had at least thirty-six weeks of normal school training, or 
its equivalent, $1.50 per week for each week not exceeding thirty-six weeks that such 
teacher is employed. 

"(3) For each teacher who has been graduated from a two-year course, in a State Normal 
School, or its equivalent, $4.00 per week for each week not exceeding thirty-six weeks that 
such teacher is employed. 

"Training substituted as an equivalent for normal school training shall be determined 
and classified by the State Examining Board for Teachers' Certificates which shall furnish 
a statement of such classification to the County Superintendent. Provided that in dis- 
tricts not under the jurisdiction of the State Examining Board, the local certificating 
authorities shall determine and classify the training substituted for normal school training, 
and furnish a statement as required above." [S. B. 220, 1. 242] 



The state is interested in a longer school year. It is also interested in 
having its schools taught by trained teachers. The state will give to any 
school district which employs a teacher with eighteen weeks normal 
training after graduation from a recognized high school the sum of fifty 
cents for each week the teacher is employed. If the district will employ 
a teacher with thirty-six weeks normal training the state will give the 
district $1.50 for each week the teacher is employed. If the district 
will employ a teacher who is a normal school graduate the state will 
give the district $4.00 for each week the teacher with this training 
is employed. 



7] 



QUALIFICATIONS OF TEACHERS IN 1922 

Of the 39,576 teachers employed in the elementary and high schools 
of the State, 7,696 were college or university graduates; 9,728 were nor- 
mal school graduates; 10,309 had high school education only. 9,552 
more had attended college or normal school; 1,154 had attended high 
school but were not graduates; 1,151 had not attended high school. 

4,823 taught for the first time in 1922. 13,913 were serving their first 
year in a new location. This shows that more than 9,000 changed posi- 
tions at close of 1921. 

7,790 were high school teachers. Of the remaining 31,786 engaged in 
elementary work, 2,109 were teaching in newly created positions. The 
average annual increase in new positions, 1917-1922 inclusive, has been 
1,145. 

The average requirement to take care of teacher changes in the state 
since 1917 has been about 4,500 per annum. The Normal Schools have 
not been working to their capacity because there has been no reward set 
up for professionally trained teachers. The result has been that the 
large investment in Normal School plants and the annual up-keep of 
these institutions has not paid a high dividend in trained teachers be- 
cause the normal schools have graduated less than 700 per annum for a 
number of years. The number of graduates this year will be much 
higher than it has been since the pre-war period. The five Normal 
Schools will have to work to their capacity to meet the demand for 
trained teachers if the provisions of Senate Bill 220 are incorporated 
into law. 

Is it not time for Illinois to fix a policy that will make its teacher- 
training institutions function.'' 

A MEASURE OF THE DISTRICT'S WILL TO HELP ITSELF 

"When the total amount for teacher training has been determined for each school dis- 
trict of the county as herein provided, such amount shall be multiplied by a fraction whose 
numerator is the district's local rate for educational purposes (including the rate for text 
books) and whose denominator is two. The total of the amounts so determined for the 
several school districts of the county shall be the apportionment for such county on the 
basis of teacher training." [S. B. 220, 1. 261] 



The state school fund should stimulate local effort for better schools. 
A district which has a low school tax rate should not expect as generous 
aid as one which invests more in its schools by having a higher tax rate. 
The state will give aid to a district to secure trained teachers only in 
ratio to the wilUngness of the district to tax itself to get better teachers. 



PUPIL ATTENDANCE 

"There shall also be apportioned to each county a sum of two cents per day for each 
daj'"s attendance of each pupil between the ages of six and tMenty-one enrolled in grades 
one to eight inclusive. A pupil day shall be one full day or major portion thereof that the 
pupil is in actuaJ attendance. Days diu-ing which schools are not in session because of an 
act of God, or upon the order of tiae Board of Health, or any other proper authority other 
than that of the Board of Directors or Board of Education, shall be deemed school days. 
Each pupil enrolled at the time of such forced intermission shall be coimted as present 
dm-ing the time such order is in force." [S. B. 220, 1. 268] 



The state wants the children in the school. The best teacher and the 
best school cannot train a child who is not in attendance. To encourage 
a regular attendance of all the children, the state will pay to each district 
two cents a day for each day a child is in the elementary school. If a 
school is in session for 100 days with an average attendance of ten 
pupils the state pays the district $20.00. If the school is in session for 
the same term with an average attendance of twenty pupils the state 
pays the district $40.00. If a district keeps its school open for 180 days 
with an average attendance of twenty pupils the state pays the district 
$72.00. 



STATE AID IN PROPORTION TO LOCAL EFFORT 

"When the total amount for pupil day attendance has been determined for each school 
district of the county as herein provided, such amount shall be multiplied by a fraction 
whose numerator is the district's local rate for educational purposes (including rate 
for text books) and whose denominator is two. The total of the amounts so determined 
for the several school districts of the county shall be the apportionment for such county 
on the basis of pupil day attendance." [S. B. 220, 1. 276] 



The state is not willing to help those who are not willing to help 
themselves. If a district does not levy the maximum educational tax 
rate the state gives aid to the district on the basis of pupil attendance 
only in the ratio of the local tax rate to the maximum educational tax 
rate. 



[9] 



THE NOR]\L\L GRADUATE IN THE RURAL SCHOOL 

"There shall also be apportioned to each county for each normal school graduate who 
teaches nine months in a one-room elementary school district, a sum to be determined by 
multiplying $100.00 by a fraction whose numerator is the tax rate for educational purposes 
of the district in which such teacher is employed and whose denominator is two." 

[S. B. 220, 1. 2S3] 



In order that normal school graduates may be willing to teach in 
one-room elementary schools, the state will give $100.00 to any district 
having such a school and employing a normal school graduate for its 
teacher. This aid is given in full only to those districts which are willing 
to tax themselves the maximum rate to secure a competent teacher. 
If a district is not wilhng to do all it can to have the best teacher it is 
possible to secm-e, the aid of the state is correspondingly reduced. 

There are approximately 10,000 one-room rural schools in Illinois. 
Fewer than 400 of the 10,000 teachers are normal graduates. Is it not 
one of the state's duties to give the boys and girls attending rural 
schools a better chance for an education by rewarding trained teachers 
who work in rural schools "^ " 



"SCHOOL DISTRICT BUDGET" 

'■Report of School District Nimiber ." 

(this section details substantially the manner in which the data necessary under the 
provisions of this Act shall be reported, and the forms to be used for that purpose) . 



"Superintendent, Principal, or Teacher." 



The several items appearing Lu this budget are all reported under the 
present laws, or are found in Sec. 211 (e) just above. The teacher and 
the secretary of any Board of Directors or Board of Education can 
readily prepare this budget for the district when they make up the 
annual report of the district. 



10] 



SOrMAPtY OF THE STATE FEXD 
DISTEIBmOX 

31,786 elementary teachers at 75c. per 

day for 170 days §4,a52.71.5.00 

166,027,000 pupU days attendanc-e at ic. 8S,3£0.,540 . 00 
ni,060 at .^.<X) per week for 3.5 weeks . . . l.o48,4<X). 00 

*l,8So at .?1 . 50 per week for 35 weeks 98.962 . Cx) 

*3,771 at so . 50 per week for 35 weeks. . . 65,99^ . W 



81 . SO average rate of taxation (180-200) 

.90x $5,033,8^4.00 4,530,505.00 

Aid for low- valuation districts . 210,000 00 

County snpermtendents' salaries 258,300.00 

Pension and retirement fund. . 327,370.00 



Grant total 89,378.890-00 

This calculation is based on 1921-1922 statistics. 
§1 . SO is the average educational rate for the State. 
35 weeks is the average length of the school year. 
170 days is the average number d days taught. 

*11,060 is the number of teachers who are n<»:!mal graduates: 1,885 
the number of teachers with one year of normal training; 3,771 the 
number with IS weeks" training. 



[Ill 



TYPICAL COMPUTATIONS 

District No. 66 in a southwestern county — a typical low-valuation-high- 
rate school district. 

Valuation below $25,000.00. Teacher without 
any Normal training. 

Educational rate $2.00 

No. weeks in school year 29 

No. teacher-school-days 148x75c. $ 111 .00 

No. days attendance 3853x2c. 77.00 

Account low valuation 148x$2 . 00x1 296 . 00 

Total to district under new plan $ 484 . 00 $484 . 00 

Received last year under old plan of distribution 85 . 00 

Gain under new plan of distribution $ 399 . 00 

If the teacher were a normal graduate, the dis- 
trict would receive additional, as given to all 
districts : 

No. weeks in school year 29x$4 . 00x1 $ 116 . 00 

Given to one-room schools only 100.00 

Total possible additional $216.00 216.00 

Total this district might receive from the 

state $700.00 

On the basis of $20,000.00 assessed valuation, 
with maximum rate, this district can raise 
as its local revenue 400 . 00 

Possible gross income (how few one-room schools 

have as much!) $1,100.00 



[121 



TYPICAL COMPUTATIONS 

District No. 12 in a central county — a typical high-valuation-low-rate 
school district. 

Valuation more than $50,000.00. Teacher has 
18 weeks' normal training. 

Educational rate $0.38 

No. weeks in school year 35 

No. teacher-school-days 175x75c. $ 131 . 25 

No. days attendance 3967x2c. $ 79.34 

Normal training 35x50c. 17.50 

Rate (.38c) [38/200 = .19] 19x 96.84 18.40 

Total to district under new plan $ 149 . 65 

Received last year by old plan of distribution.. . 180.00 

Decrease $30.35 

This district can get, if it employs a normal 
graduate: 

No. weeks in school year . . . 35x$4 . OOx .19 26 . 60 

Given to all one-room schools 

$100. OOx. 19 19.00 

Total additional this district might receive $ 45.60 $45.60 

Total this district might receive from the 

state $195 . 25 

On the basis of $50,000.00 assessed valuation, 
with maximum rate, this district can raise 

as its local revenue 1,000 . 00 

Possible gToss income for this district $1,195.25 

But, by increasing its local educational rate, the district would receive proportion- 
ately more from the state. 

This comparison shows clearly how the new plan of distribution would operate to 
send state money to districts that need it, rather than those that do not. 



13] 



TYPICAL COMPUTATIONS 

Small city in the northeastern part of the state: 

No. teachers . . 12 No. weeks in school year . . 36 

No. teacher-school-days 181x75c.xl2 $1629 . 00 

Does not employ any normal graduates. 

No. days attendance 88,478x2c. $1770.00 

No. teachers with 18 weeks' training. . Ix50c.x36 18.00 

No. teachers with 36 weeks' normal training 

lx$l. 50x36 54.00 

Rate $2.00 [2.00/2.00 = 1] Ix $1842.00 

Total to district under new plan 

Received last year under old plan 

Gain, by new plan of distribution 

Small city in the northeastern part of the state: 

No. teacher-school-days 171x75c.xl0 

No. teachers 10 

No. weeks in the school year 34 

No. days attendance 65,616x2c. 1212.00 

No. teachers with 18 weeks' normal training . . 
No. teachers with 36 weeks' normal training . . 
No. graduates of normal school lx$4 . 00x34 136 . 00 

Rate $3.00 [3.00/2.00 = 1.5] 1.5x $1348.00 $2002.00 

Total to district under new plan 3305 . 00 

Received last year under old plan] 5170.00 

Loss under the new plan of distribution 1865 .00 



$1842.00 

$3471.00 

2864 . 00 

607.00 



$1283.00 



[14] 



TYPICAL COMPUTATIONS 

City in the northern part of the state: 

No. teacher-school-days 185x75c.x322 $44,678 . 00 

No. teachers 322 

No. weeks in school year 36 

No. days attendance I,377,306x2c. $27,546.00 

No. teachers with 18 weeks' training 

70x50c.x36 1,260.00 

No. teachers with 36 weeks' training 

63x$l. 50x36 3,402.00 

No. graduates of normal 189x$4 . 00x36 27,216 . 00 

Rate $1.99 [1.99/2.00= .995] 995x $59,424.00 59,127.00 

Total to district under new plan $103,805 . 00 

Received last year under old plan 70,474 . 00 

Gain, by new plan $33,331 .00 

City in the eastern part of the state: 

No. teacher-school-days 179x75c.x74 $ 9,935 . 00 

No. teachers 74 

No. weeks in school year 36 

No. days attendance 366,757x2c. $ 7,325 . 00 

No. teachers with 18 weeks' training 

40x50c.x36 900.00 

No. teachers with 36 weeks' training 

10x$l. 50x36 540.00 

No. teachers graduates of normal school 

13x$4. 00x36 1,872.00 

Rate $1 . 92 [192/200 =96] 96x $10,637 . 00 10,201 . 00 

Total to district under new plan $20,136.00 

Received last year under old plan 25,670 . 00 

Loss, by new plan $5,534 . 00 



[151 



TYPICAL COMPUTATIONS 

A West-central County: 

Total no. teacher-school-days.43,912x75c. $32,934 . 00 

Total no. days attendance. . . 578,21 0x2c. . $1 1 ,564 . 00 

Teachers having 18 weeks' training 682.00 

Teachers having 36 weeks' training 1,488.00 

Teachers, graduates of normal schools . . . 5,232 . 00 



Average tax rate 1.395 [1.395/2.000 = .697] 

697x $18,966.00 13,219.00 

No. normal graduates . . . 2x$100 . OOx . 697 139 . 00 

Total for two cities not included above. . 31,458.00 



Total for this county, under new plan of 

distribution $77,750.00 

Received last year under old plan 45,592 . 00 

Gain under new plan $32,158.00 

An East-central County: 

Total no. teacher-school-days 26,077x75c. $19,557 . 75 

Total no. days attendance. . . . 491,993x2c. $ 9,839 . 86 
No. teachers with 18 weeks' training 

(39x50c.x32) 624.00 

No. teachers with 36 weeks' training 

32x1.50x32 1,536.00 

No. teachers, graduates of normal schools 

10x$4. 00x32 1,280.00 



Average tax-rate $1.35 [1.35/2.00 = .675] 

675x $13,279.86 $8,963.90 

No. normal graduates in one-room schools 

lx$100.00x.675 67.50 



Total for this county under new plan .... $28,589 . 15 

Received last year under old plan 16,303.44 

Gain under new plan $12,285 . 71 



[16 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

021 496 760 




